[JPL] Oh! RIAA! Woman Must Pay $1.5 Million for IllegallyDownloaded Songs

Louis Erlanger louisx at myfairpoint.net
Thu Nov 4 13:00:30 EDT 2010


For the longest time many record company and music publishing employees 
didn't even know that a lot of the music they were selling was recorded with 
the help of computers.  The issue of ownership is a complicated one, and 
often judges aren't familiar with the nuances. While these claims for 
damages are ridiculously high and obviously intended to discourage theft, 
and I believe the RIAA's approach is wrong, if I write music and someone 
uses it to increase their own income, say, in an ad, a video, on a website, 
for a political campaign, etc., I should be compensated for the added value 
my music provides. Just because computers and the Internet make it easy to 
disseminate music, that doesn't take away its inherent value. Music is so 
often used to create an image or a mood that is intended to increase sales 
for someone other than the writer, or to increase Youtube video views that 
generate ad income. Why shouldn't the writer benefit from the use of his or 
her creation?


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <onthebeach at aol.com>
To: <jazzproglist at jazzweek.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: [JPL] Oh! RIAA! Woman Must Pay $1.5 Million for 
IllegallyDownloaded Songs


>
> another example of how far wrong a once vibrant industry has gone.  to 
> this day the recording industry barely has a clue that the digital age has 
> arrived some many years ago.  in continuing to pursue these types of 
> cases-with such fervor and insane claims for damages-it has done a 
> disservice to the many who once made a living in the industry.  the head 
> of the largest record label in the world still "boasts" that he doesnt own 
> a computer!  a modern day Nero...
>
>
> its an interesting view to the flaws in the Justice system too. when you 
> go into court, its truly the "luck of the draw" as to who sits on the 
> bench...illegal downloading has never been dealt with in any coherent 
> fashion with penalties that are even remotely in line with the crime.  the 
> industry succeeded in spending decades of currency with customers almost 
> overnight, leaving it teetering on the abyss having given itself two black 
> eyes.
>
>
> ah to what once was....still musicians and artists will continue to create 
> and technology will give more people more and easier access to more music 
> than ever before in history. the larger issues of intellectual copyright 
> protection remain serious questions to ponder.  while content will retain 
> an important position atop the heap, will "ownership" retain its sizzle 
> without Global standards of international law?  watch what happens to 
> movies over thw next 24-36 months as true high speed broadband becomes 
> ubiquitous, even in the slow-to-catch up United States.
>
>
> RIAA. what have you done?
>
>
> ricky schultz
> www.jazzconsultant com
>    and coming soon...
> www.makinmovies.us
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dr. Jazz <drjazz at drjazz.com>
> To: jazzproglist at jazzweek.com
> Sent: Thu, Nov 4, 2010 7:52 am
> Subject: [JPL] Woman Must Pay $1.5 Million for Illegally Downloaded Songs
>
>
> Jammie Thomas-Rasset, the Minnesota woman who has been fighting the 
> recording industry over 24 songs she illegally downloaded and shared 
> online four years ago, has lost another round in court.
>
> A jury in Minneapolis decided today that she was liable for $1.5 million 
> in copyright infringement damages to Capitol Records, or $62,500 for each 
> song she illegally shared in April 2006.
>
> The Recording Industry Association of America--the trade group that 
> represents the four major music labels--applauded the verdict.
>
> "We are again thankful to the jury for its service in this matter and that 
> they recognized the severity of the defendant's misconduct," the RIAA said 
> in a statement. "Now with three jury decisions behind us along with a 
> clear affirmation of Ms. Thomas-Rasset's willful liability, it is our hope 
> that she finally accepts responsibility for her actions."
>
> Thomas-Rasset is expected to appeal today's judgment before Michael Davis, 
> the chief judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, 
> who had previously slashed the damage award in an earlier judgment against 
> Thomas-Rasset.
>
> "We intend to raise our constitutional challenge again before Judge 
> Davis," Kiwi Camara, an attorney representing Thomas-Rasset, said in a 
> statement to CNET. "The fight continues."
>
> The trial is the third for Thomas-Rasset, who was originally accused of 
> sharing 1,700 songs--enough to fill about 150 CDs. After one jury found 
> her liable for copyright infringement in 2007 
> <http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9791383-7.html> and ordered her to pay 
> $222,000, the judge in the case later ruled that he erred in instructing 
> the jury and called for a retrial. In the second trial, which took place 
> in 2009, a jury found Thomas-Rasset liable for $1.92 million 
> <http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10268199-93.html>.
>
> Thomas-Rasset subsequently asked the federal court for a new trial 
> <http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10280531-93.html> or a reduction in the 
> amount of damages in July 2009.
>
> But earlier this year, the judge found that amount to be "monstrous and 
> shocking" and reduced the amount to $54,000 
> <http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-10439636-261.html>. Following that, the 
> RIAA informed Thomas-Rasset that it would accept $25,000--less than half 
> of the court-reduced award--if she agreed to ask the judge to "vacate" his 
> decision, which means removing his decision from the record. Thomas-Rasset 
> rejected <http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-10442482-261.html> that offer 
> almost immediately.
>
> /Updated at 8:20 p.m. PT with comment from Thomas-Rasset attorney, and at 
> 9:10 p.m. to emphasize the illegal sharing aspect of the copyright 
> complaint./
>
>
> Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-20021735-93.html#ixzz14KEtQ6SW
>
> -- Dr. Jazz
> Dr. Jazz Operations
> 24270 Eastwood
> Oak Park, MI  48237
> (248) 542-7888
> http://www.drjazz.com
> SKYPE:  drjazz99
>
>
> -- 
>
> Jazz Programmers' Mailing List: jazzproglist at jazzweek.com
> List information: http://lists.jazzweek.com/mailman/listinfo/jazzproglist
> List archive: http://lists.jazzweek.com/pipermail/jazzproglist/
> Sponsorship information: jplsponsor at jazzweek.com
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Jazz Programmers' Mailing List: jazzproglist at jazzweek.com
> List information: http://lists.jazzweek.com/mailman/listinfo/jazzproglist
> List archive: http://lists.jazzweek.com/pipermail/jazzproglist/
> Sponsorship information: jplsponsor at jazzweek.com
>
> 




More information about the jazzproglist mailing list